USPTO Examiner SHIBUYA MARK LANCE - Art Unit 1631

Recent Applications

Detailed information about the 100 most recent patent applications.

Application NumberTitleFiling DateDisposal DateDispositionTime (months)Office ActionsRestrictionsInterviewAppeal
19170240METABOLICALLY OPTIMIZED CELL CULTUREApril 2025October 2025Allow600NoNo
18223164EXTRACELLULAR MATRIX SUBSTITUTE IN A CELLULAR MICROCOMPARTMENTJuly 2023February 2026Allow3110NoNo
18256530CELL LINES FOR PRODUCTION OF ADENO-ASSOCIATED VIRUSJune 2023February 2026Allow3210NoNo
18325648METHODS OF TREATING CANCERMay 2023February 2026Allow3310NoNo
18038190METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR LINKING RNA STEM LOOPSMay 2023October 2025Allow2900NoNo
18250158ANTI-APOPTOTIC VECTOR AND METHOD OF USING THE SAMEApril 2023February 2026Allow3410NoNo
18301228CONJUGATE SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF USE THEREOFApril 2023November 2025Allow3100NoNo
18030683RECOMBINANT ADENO-ASSOCIATED VIRUSES FOR CNS OR MUSCLE DELIVERYApril 2023October 2025Allow3100YesNo
18194551METHOD OF GENERATING MULTIPOTENT STEM CELLSMarch 2023December 2025Allow3310NoNo
18116415METHOD FOR PRODUCING OLIGODENDROCYTE-LIKE CELLSMarch 2023January 2026Allow3410NoNo
18177695UNIVERSAL DONOR CELLSMarch 2023November 2025Allow3310NoNo
18177693UNIVERSAL DONOR CELLSMarch 2023November 2025Allow3210YesNo
18043108METHOD, SYSTEM AND DEVICE FOR PROGRAMMED CELL FREEZINGFebruary 2023September 2025Allow3000NoNo
18067204ENCAPSULATED CELLS EXPRESSING IL-12 AND USES THEREOFDecember 2022March 2026Allow3910NoNo
17906679CARDIAC ORGANOID, MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR, AND METHOD FOR EVALUATING DRUG TOXICITY BY USING SAMESeptember 2022August 2025Allow3500NoNo
17905830IN-VITRO TRANSCRIPT MRNA AND PHARMACEUTICAL COMPOSITION COMPRISING SAMESeptember 2022December 2025Allow3910NoNo
17897011AGENT FOR CRYOPRESERVATION AND METHOD FOR CRYOPRESERVATION OF MITOCHONDRIA USING THE SAMEAugust 2022August 2025Allow3510YesNo
17796839Compositions and Methods for Controlling Production of Polypeptides in CellsAugust 2022December 2025Allow4110NoNo
17861042COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR IMMUNE CELL MODULATION IN ADOPTIVE IMMUNOTHERAPIESJuly 2022July 2025Allow3611NoNo
17791096COMPOSITION FOR REINFORCING FUNCTION OF STEM CELLJuly 2022December 2025Abandon4210NoNo
17845793Chimeric Antigen Receptor and Natural Killer Cells Expressing SameJune 2022June 2025Allow3531NoNo
17843121METABOLICALLY OPTIMIZED CELL CULTUREJune 2022December 2024Allow3010NoNo
17757041METHODS AND CONSTRUCTS FOR TRANSIENT PRODUCTION OF LENTIVIRAL VECTORJune 2022April 2025Allow3410NoNo
17778309PROCESSES FOR THE PRODUCTION OF TUMOR INFILTRATING LYMPHOCYTES (TILS) AND METHODS OF USING THE SAMEMay 2022May 2025Allow3600NoNo
17776506Methods for Reprogramming CellsMay 2022October 2025Allow4110YesNo
17755051FIBROBLAST-BASED THERAPY FOR TREATMENT OF SCLEROSING CHOLANGITISApril 2022December 2025Abandon4410NoNo
17754812PREVENTION OF RECURRENT MISCARRIAGES THROUGH ADMINISTRATION OF FIBROBLASTS AND FIBROBLAST-EDUCATED PATERNAL CELLSApril 2022May 2025Allow3700NoNo
17767777METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR PRIME EDITING RNAApril 2022June 2025Allow3800NoNo
17715177Genome EngineeringApril 2022July 2025Allow3961NoNo
17765637METHOD FOR PRODUCING FIBRIN SHEETMarch 2022April 2025Allow3700NoNo
17707060Transgenic Non-Human Vertebrate for the Expression of Class-Switched, Fully Human, AntibodiesMarch 2022May 2025Abandon3801NoNo
17703750Animal models and therapeutic moleculesMarch 2022October 2025Abandon4320NoNo
17701267INDUCED PLURIPOTENT CELL-DERIVED OLIGODENDROCYTE PROGENITOR CELLS FOR THE TREATMENT OF MYELIN DISORDERSMarch 2022March 2025Allow3511NoNo
17651505METHOD TO PREPARE SPERMFebruary 2022March 2025Allow3710NoNo
17597743HEXOKINASE 1 ISOFORM B FOR USE AS A PROGNOSIS MARKER AND SPECIFIC TARGET AGAINST CANCERJanuary 2022August 2025Allow4201NoNo
17531172UNIVERSAL DONOR CELLSNovember 2021March 2025Allow4031NoNo
17434209IMPROVED PROCESS FOR DNA INTEGRATION USING RNA-GUIDED ENDONUCLEASESAugust 2021March 2026Abandon5421NoNo
17407558Use of Lyso-GB1 as Druggable TargetAugust 2021March 2025Allow4310NoNo
17373194ENGINEERED LYMPHOCYTE COMPOSITIONS, METHODS AND SYSTEMSJuly 2021November 2025Abandon5310NoNo
17363798Systems and Methods for the Production of Human Polyclonal AntibodiesJune 2021August 2025Allow4910YesNo
17356423ELIMINATION OF PD-L1-POSITIVE MALIGNANCIES BY PD-L1 CHIMERIC ANTIGEN RECEPTOR-EXPRESSING NK CELLSJune 2021July 2025Allow4910YesNo
17356411ELIMINATION OF PD-L1-POSITIVE MALIGNANCIES BY PD-L1 CHIMERIC ANTIGEN RECEPTOR-EXPRESSING NK CELLSJune 2021July 2025Allow4910YesNo
17304585METHODS FOR ACTIVATION AND EXPANSION OF NATURAL KILLER CELLS AND USES THEREOFJune 2021August 2025Allow5011NoNo
17331423Coordinating Gene Expression Using RNA Destabilizing ElementsMay 2021September 2025Abandon5210NoNo
17282421RAAV Vectors for the Treatment of GM1 and GM2 GangliosidosisApril 2021June 2025Allow5021NoNo
17200633GENERATION OF SYNTHETIC GENOMESMarch 2021December 2024Allow4511NoNo
17189434MANUFACTURING METHOD FOR SUBSTRATE ON WHICH NERVE CELLS ARE ARRANGEDMarch 2021December 2024Allow4640YesNo
17269787METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR RNA EXPRESSION OF MYC INHIBITORSFebruary 2021January 2025Abandon4701NoNo
16973688Compositions for Drug Delivery and Methods of Use ThereofDecember 2020March 2025Allow5111NoNo
17096192CHIMERIC ANTIGEN RECEPTOR AND ITS USENovember 2020May 2025Allow5421NoNo
17075556VIRAL VECTORS ENCODING RECOMBINANT FIX WITH INCREASED EXPRESSION FOR GENE THERAPY OF HEMOPHILIA BOctober 2020August 2025Abandon5831NoNo
17025637SPHERICAL NUCLEIC ACIDS WITH TAILORED AND ACTIVE PROTEIN CORONAESeptember 2020January 2025Allow5221YesNo
16970790T CELL DISEASE TREATMENT TARGETING TAG-72August 2020December 2024Allow5221NoNo
16970937METHODS FOR ACTIVATION AND EXPANSION OF NATURAL KILLER CELLS AND USES THEREOFAugust 2020April 2025Allow5631NoNo
16835913COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING AND PREVENTING MACULAR DEGENERATIONMarch 2020February 2025Allow5940YesNo
16836513Synergistic Enhancement of the Delivery of Nucleic Acids via Blended FormulationsMarch 2020June 2025Allow6050YesNo
16635863CELLULAR MODELS OF AND THERAPIES FOR OCULAR DISEASESJanuary 2020April 2025Allow6032YesNo
16086127Trans-Replicating RNASeptember 2018February 2025Allow6031YesNo
10568572HYDROGEN SUCCINATE SALTS OF [TRANS-4-((1R,3S)-6-CHLORO-3-PHENYLINDAN-1-YL)-1,2,2-TRIMETHYLPIPERAZINE AND THE USE AS A MEDICAMENTAugust 2006March 2010Allow4920NoYes
10519722AMIDE DERIVATIVEDecember 2004October 2008Allow4640NoNo
10874992PHOSPHORIC ACID SALT OF A DIPEPTIDYL PEPTIDASE-IV INHIBITORJune 2004October 2007Allow4010YesNo
10701584SYNTHETIC LACTONE FORMULATIONS AND METHOD OF USENovember 2003August 2007Allow4621NoYes
10476196HETEROCYCLIC COMPOUND DERIVATIVES AND MEDICINESOctober 2003December 2006Allow3821NoNo

Appeals Overview

This analysis examines appeal outcomes and the strategic value of filing appeals for examiner SHIBUYA, MARK LANCE.

Strategic Value of Filing an Appeal

Total Appeal Filings
2
Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(50.0%)
Not Allowed After Appeal Filing
1
(50.0%)
Filing Benefit Percentile
77.2%
Higher than average

Understanding Appeal Filing Strategy

Filing a Notice of Appeal can sometimes lead to allowance even before the appeal is fully briefed or decided by the PTAB. This occurs when the examiner or their supervisor reconsiders the rejection during the mandatory appeal conference (MPEP § 1207.01) after the appeal is filed.

In this dataset, 50.0% of applications that filed an appeal were subsequently allowed. This appeal filing benefit rate is in the top 25% across the USPTO, indicating that filing appeals is particularly effective here. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Strategic Recommendations

Filing a Notice of Appeal is strategically valuable. The act of filing often prompts favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.

Examiner SHIBUYA, MARK LANCE - Prosecution Strategy Guide

Executive Summary

Examiner SHIBUYA, MARK LANCE works in Art Unit 1631 and has examined 28 patent applications in our dataset. With an allowance rate of 82.1%, this examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications. Applications typically reach final disposition in approximately 50 months.

Allowance Patterns

Examiner SHIBUYA, MARK LANCE's allowance rate of 82.1% places them in the 54% percentile among all USPTO examiners. This examiner has an above-average tendency to allow applications.

Office Action Patterns

On average, applications examined by SHIBUYA, MARK LANCE receive 2.07 office actions before reaching final disposition. This places the examiner in the 54% percentile for office actions issued. This examiner issues a slightly above-average number of office actions.

Prosecution Timeline

The median time to disposition (half-life) for applications examined by SHIBUYA, MARK LANCE is 50 months. This places the examiner in the 5% percentile for prosecution speed. Applications take longer to reach final disposition with this examiner compared to most others.

Interview Effectiveness

Conducting an examiner interview provides a +27.8% benefit to allowance rate for applications examined by SHIBUYA, MARK LANCE. This interview benefit is in the 75% percentile among all examiners. Recommendation: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner and should be strongly considered as a prosecution strategy. Per MPEP § 713.10, interviews are available at any time before the Notice of Allowance is mailed or jurisdiction transfers to the PTAB.

Request for Continued Examination (RCE) Effectiveness

When applicants file an RCE with this examiner, 32.5% of applications are subsequently allowed. This success rate is in the 69% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Insight: RCEs show above-average effectiveness with this examiner. Consider whether your amendments or new arguments are strong enough to warrant an RCE versus filing a continuation.

After-Final Amendment Practice

This examiner enters after-final amendments leading to allowance in 37.5% of cases where such amendments are filed. This entry rate is in the 56% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Recommendation: This examiner shows above-average receptiveness to after-final amendments. If your amendments clearly overcome the rejections and do not raise new issues, consider filing after-final amendments before resorting to an RCE.

Appeal Withdrawal and Reconsideration

This examiner withdraws rejections or reopens prosecution in 100.0% of appeals filed. This is in the 86% percentile among all examiners. Of these withdrawals, 100.0% occur early in the appeal process (after Notice of Appeal but before Appeal Brief). Strategic Insight: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1207.01, all appeals must go through a mandatory appeal conference. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration even before you file an Appeal Brief.

Petition Practice

When applicants file petitions regarding this examiner's actions, 87.5% are granted (fully or in part). This grant rate is in the 87% percentile among all examiners. Strategic Note: Petitions are frequently granted regarding this examiner's actions compared to other examiners. Per MPEP § 1002.02(c), various examiner actions are petitionable to the Technology Center Director, including prematureness of final rejection, refusal to enter amendments, and requirement for information. If you believe an examiner action is improper, consider filing a petition.

Examiner Cooperation and Flexibility

Examiner's Amendments: This examiner makes examiner's amendments in 10.7% of allowed cases (in the 94% percentile). Per MPEP § 1302.04, examiner's amendments are used to place applications in condition for allowance when only minor changes are needed. This examiner frequently uses this tool compared to other examiners, indicating a cooperative approach to getting applications allowed. Strategic Insight: If you are close to allowance but minor claim amendments are needed, this examiner may be willing to make an examiner's amendment rather than requiring another round of prosecution.

Quayle Actions: This examiner issues Ex Parte Quayle actions in 8.7% of allowed cases (in the 87% percentile). Per MPEP § 714.14, a Quayle action indicates that all claims are allowable but formal matters remain. This examiner frequently uses Quayle actions compared to other examiners, which is a positive indicator that once substantive issues are resolved, allowance follows quickly.

Prosecution Strategy Recommendations

Based on the statistical analysis of this examiner's prosecution patterns, here are tailored strategic recommendations:

  • Prioritize examiner interviews: Interviews are highly effective with this examiner. Request an interview after the first office action to clarify issues and potentially expedite allowance.
  • Appeal filing as negotiation tool: This examiner frequently reconsiders rejections during the appeal process. Filing a Notice of Appeal may prompt favorable reconsideration during the mandatory appeal conference.
  • Plan for extended prosecution: Applications take longer than average with this examiner. Factor this into your continuation strategy and client communications.
  • Examiner cooperation: This examiner frequently makes examiner's amendments to place applications in condition for allowance. If you are close to allowance, the examiner may help finalize the claims.

Relevant MPEP Sections for Prosecution Strategy

  • MPEP § 713.10: Examiner interviews - available before Notice of Allowance or transfer to PTAB
  • MPEP § 714.12: After-final amendments - may be entered "under justifiable circumstances"
  • MPEP § 1002.02(c): Petitionable matters to Technology Center Director
  • MPEP § 1004: Actions requiring primary examiner signature (allowances, final rejections, examiner's answers)
  • MPEP § 1207.01: Appeal conferences - mandatory for all appeals
  • MPEP § 1214.07: Reopening prosecution after appeal

Important Disclaimer

Not Legal Advice: The information provided in this report is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. You should consult with a qualified patent attorney or agent for advice specific to your situation.

No Guarantees: We do not provide any guarantees as to the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the statistics presented above. Patent prosecution statistics are derived from publicly available USPTO data and are subject to data quality limitations, processing errors, and changes in USPTO practices over time.

Limitation of Liability: Under no circumstances will IronCrow AI be liable for any outcome, decision, or action resulting from your reliance on the statistics, analysis, or recommendations presented in this report. Past prosecution patterns do not guarantee future results.

Use at Your Own Risk: While we strive to provide accurate and useful prosecution statistics, you should independently verify any information that is material to your prosecution strategy and use your professional judgment in all patent prosecution matters.